Introduction
This study sought to explore the perceptions of distance education administrators and faculty who teach online in the Florida Community College System regarding: (a) the relative importance of specific competencies and roles (Goodyear et al., 2001;
Pankowski, 2004; Thach & Murphy, 1995; Williams, 2003) for teaching online courses, and (b) the need to engage in faculty development that is supportive of these
competencies. This chapter presents the results of the study. Selected demographic characteristics of the responding FDLC administrators and distance education faculty, organization of online support services within the institution, along with the results of the data analysis with respect to eight research questions are described.
Description of the Population
The data for this study were collected during the spring term 2006. Participation in the Survey of Competencies for Teaching an Online Course was voluntary, and responses were considered to reflect respondents’ perceptions of the importance of core competencies/roles and the need for faculty development to support online instruction. A total of 20 distance learning administrator and 52 online faculty surveys were
returned from the original populations of 28 administrators and 100 faculty throughout the Florida Community College System.
Table 1 displays the general demographic characteristics of the distance education administrator respondents. Female respondents (n=14 or 70%) exceeded male
respondents (n=6 or 30%) by 40%. The mean age was 49 years. A majority of respondents (55.8%) were between 41 and 55 years of age. A total of 3 (16.7%)
respondents were 40 years of age or younger, while 5 (27.8%) respondents were 56 years of age or older. Thus, 13 (72.2%) of distance education administrator respondents were 55 years of age or younger. The total ethnic minority representation (n=1 or 5.3%) was just above 5%.
With regard to years of community college teaching experience, 3 (15%) respondents indicated 1-5 years; 6 (30%) had 6-10 years; 5 (25%) had 11-15 years; 4 (20%) had 16-20 years; and only 2 (10%) had 21 or more years experience. The mean was 12.25 years of community college teaching experience for distance education administrators.
For community college online teaching experience, the mean was 3.59 years for distance education administrators. The majority of respondents (64.7%) were in the medium level with 3-5 years of experience teaching an online course in the community college. Only 1 (5.9%) respondent had 6 or more years, while 5 (29.4%) respondents had 1 to 2 years of online teaching experience in the community college.
TABLE 1
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF DISTANCE EDUCATION AMINISTRATORS (N=20)
Component Frequency Percentage
Gender Male 6 30.0 Female 14 70.0 Total 20 100.0 Age 33-40 Years 3 16.7 41-48 Years 6 33.3 49-55 Years 4 22.2 56 Years or more 5 27.8 Total 18 100.0 Ethnicity American Indian or Native Alaskan 1 5.3
Caucasian 18 94.7 Total 19 100.0 Teaching Experience 1-5 Years 3 15.0 6-10 Years 6 30.0 11-15 Years 5 25.0 16-20 Years 4 20.0 21 Years or more 2 10.0 Total 20 100.0
Online Teaching Experience
1-2 Years (Low) 5 29.4
3-5 Years (Medium) 11 64.7
6 Years or more (High) 1 5.9
Total 17 100.0
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Table 2 presents the demographic descriptors of the online faculty respondents. Female respondents (n=32 or 62.7%) exceeded male respondents (n=19 or 37.3%) by 25.4%. The mean age for online faculty was 47 years. More than one-third of
respondents (36.2%) were between 33 and 40 years of age. A total of 22 (46.8%)
respondents were 49 years of age or older, while only 8 (17%) respondents were between 41 and 48 years old. Thus, 25 (53.2%) of online faculty respondents were 48 years of age or younger. The total ethnic minority representation (n=5 or 10%) was 10%.
With regard to years of community college teaching experience for faculty
respondents, the mean was 11.87 years. Sixteen (30.8%) respondents indicated 1-5 years; 13 (25%) had 6-10 years; 4 (7.7%) had 11-15 years; 12 (23.1%) had 16-20 years; and 7 (13.5%) had 21 or more years experience.
Ten online faculty (19.2%) indicated a high level of online teaching experience in the community college with 6 or more years. The mean was 3.71 years. Seventeen (32.7%) faculty respondents were in the low level for online teaching with 1-2 years of experience, and 25 (48.1%) respondents had 3-5 years and ranked at the medium level of experience for online teaching in the community college.
TABLE 2
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ONLINE FACULTY (N=52)
Component Frequency Percentage
Gender Male 19 37.3 Female 32 62.7 Total 51 100.0 Age 33-40 Years 17 36.2 41-48 Years 8 17.0 49-55 Years 11 23.4 56 Years or more 11 23.4 Total 47 100.0
Component Frequency Percentage Ethnicity Caucasian 42 84.0 Hispanic 5 10.0 Other 3 6.0 Total 50 100.0 Teaching Experience 1-5 Years 16 30.8 6-10 Years 13 25.0 11-15 Years 4 7.7 16-20 Years 12 23.1 21 Years or more 7 13.5 Total 52 100.0
Online Teaching Experience
1-2 Years (Low) 17 32.7
3-5 Years (Medium) 25 48.1
6 Years or more (High) 10 19.2
Total 52 100.0
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Institutional Organization of Online Course Support
Respondents were requested to indicate departmental responsibility within their institution for Web course development, Web course technical support, and Web course faculty training. Data was drawn from survey questions 7, 8, and 9 which asked
participants to select Distance Learning, Institutional Technology, Teaching and Learning Center, or Other with an option to name the department. The results for administrators responses, displayed in Table 3, suggest that the Distance Learning department has primary responsibility for Web course development (45%) and Web course faculty training (50%); whereas, the Institutional Technology department retains central
respondents record that their institution does not have a comprehensive training plan for faculty interested in teaching an online course.
TABLE 3
INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATION OF ONLINE COURSE SUPPORT – DISTANCE EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS (N=20)
Department Description Frequency Percentage
Responsible for Web Course Development
Distance Learning 9 45.0
Instructional Technology 8 40.0
Other 3 15.0
Total 20 100.0
Responsible for Web Course Technical Support
Distance Learning 9 45.0
Institutional Technology 10 50.0
Other 1 5.0
Total 20 100.0
Responsible for Web Course Faculty Training
Distance Learning 10 50.0
Institutional Technology 7 35.0
Other 3 15.0
Total 20 100.0
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Table 4 presents the results of online faculty responses to departmental
responsibility within their institution for Web course development, Web course technical support, and Web course faculty training based on their responses to survey items 7, 8, and 9. These results suggest that the Institutional Technology department has the primary responsibility for Web course technical support (47.1%) and Web course faculty training (39.2%). Interestingly, 22 (43.1%) respondents, the highest frequency and percentage, indicated responsibility to an Other department for Web course development, but the
Distance Learning (37.3%) department was the most consistently identified. The majority of online faculty respondents (61.5%) record that their institution does have a comprehensive training plan for faculty interested in teaching an online course.
TABLE 4
INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATION OF ONLINE COURSE SUPPORT – ONLINE FACULTY (N=52)
Department Description Frequency Percentage
Responsible for Web Course Development
Distance Learning 19 37.3
Instructional Technology 8 15.7
Teaching and Learning Center 2 3.9
Other 22 43.1
Total 51 100.0%
Responsible for Web Course Technical Support
Distance Learning 16 31.4%
Institutional Technology 24 47.1%
Teaching and Learning Center 3 5.9%
Other 8 15.7%
Total 51 100.0%
Responsible for Web Course Faculty Training
Distance Learning 14 27.5%
Institutional Technology 20 39.2%
Teaching and Learning Center 7 13.7%
Other 10 19.6%
Total 51 100.0%
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Findings of Research Question 1
How do distance education administrators and faculty who teach online in the Florida Community College System (FCCS) rank the importance of core competencies and roles identified in the literature (Goodyear et al., 2001; Pankowski, 2004; Thach & Murphy, 1995; Williams, 2003) for effective online instruction?
All survey respondents were asked to rank order listed core competencies and roles for teaching an online course according to high, medium, or low priority as specified for survey questions 11, 12, and 13. These rankings were subsequently assigned a scale score value of 1- High, 2- Medium, or 3- Low. Respondents ranked nine competencies and roles into three categories; therefore, each category had the potential to capture three items. Order of ranking was initially assigned based on frequency and percentage of High Priority (1) counts. When the frequency and percentage in the high priority category tied, the medium priority frequency and
percentage for those items was utilized as a secondary indicator of importance. Table 5 displays the composite rank order of core competencies and roles for distance education administrators.
TABLE 5
RANKINGS OF IMPORTANCE OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES – DISTANCE EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS (N=20)
Frequencies and Percentages Core Competency and Role
High Medium Low Provide grades, feedback, and
validation of the learner’s work 15 75.0% 5 25.0% 0 0% Facilitating online activities that
Support student learning 13 65.0% 6 30.0% 1 5.0% Creation and design of online learning
tasks and assignments 9 45.0% 4 20.0% 7 35.0% Attention to facilitating learner’s
growth in understanding of course
Core Competency and Role Frequencies and Percentages
High Medium Low
Collaboration to determine technological choices to improve
learning for students 6 30.0% 6 30.0% 8 40.0%
Provide learners with individual
strategies to engage in the course at the
highest level 5 25.0% 12 60.0% 3 15.0%
Consistent production of new, relevant knowledge to the content area being
taught 4 20.0% 8 40.0% 8 40.0%
Soliciting peer and student feedback for
course improvement 2 10.0% 8 40.0% 10 50.0%
Securing facilities for face-to-face
orientations (if prescribed) 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 18 90.0% Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
In order of importance, the three competencies and roles of high priority for distance education administrators were providing grades and feedback (75%), facilitating to support student learning (65%), and creating online assignments and tasks (45%). Securing facilities (5%), soliciting feedback for course improvement (10%), and
producing new and relevant content knowledge (20%) were categorized as low priority. The three areas receiving an overall medium priority ranking from the distance education administrators were facilitating understanding of course content (30%), making
technology choices (30%), and providing learner engagement strategies (25%). Table 6 displays the composite rank order of core competencies and roles for online faculty. In order of importance, the three competencies and roles of high priority for online faculty were providing grades and feedback (68.6%), facilitating to support
student learning (64.7%), and creating online assignments and tasks (58.8%). Securing facilities (2%), soliciting feedback for course improvement (3.9%), and making
technology choices (7.8%) were ranked as low priority. The three areas receiving an overall medium priority ranking from the online faculty were facilitating understanding of course content (51%), producing new and relevant content knowledge (27.5%), and providing learner engagement strategies (10.1%).
TABLE 6
RANKINGS OF IMPORTANCE OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES – ONLINE FACULTY (N=52)
Frequencies and Percentages Core Competency and Role
High Medium Low Provide grades, feedback, and
validation of the learner’s work 35 68.6% 9 17.6% 7 13.7% Facilitating online activities that
Support student learning 33 64.7% 15 29.4% 3 5.9% Creation and design of online
learning tasks and assignments 30 58.8% 10 19.6% 11 21.6% Attention to facilitating learner’s
growth in understanding of course
content materials 26 51.0% 19 37.3% 6 11.8%
Consistent production of new, relevant knowledge to the content
area being taught 14 27.5% 19 37.3% 18 35.3%
Provide learners with individual strategies to engage in the course
at the highest level 9 10.1% 30 58.8% 12 23.5% Collaboration to determine
technological choices to improve
Core Competency and Role Frequencies and Percentages
High Medium Low
Soliciting peer and student
feedback for course improvement 2 3.9% 30 58.8% 19 37.3% Securing facilities for face-to-face
orientations (if prescribed) 1 2.0% 3 5.9% 47 92.2% Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Findings of Research Question 2
Is there a significant difference in the perceived rankings of competencies and roles between distance education administrators and online faculty?
Distance education administrators and online faculty survey respondents were asked to rank order listed core competencies and roles for teaching an online course according to high, medium, or low priority as specified for survey questions 11, 12, and 13. Table 7 shows that both groups ranked seven of the nine competencies and roles at the same level: 1- Provides grades, feedback, and validation of learner’s work; 2- Facilitates online learning activities that support student learning; 3- Creation and design of online learning tasks and assignments; 4- Attention to facilitating learner’s growth in understanding of course content materials; 6- Provides learners with individual strategies to engage in the course at the highest level; 8- Solicits peer and student feedback for course improvement; and, 9- Secures facilities for face-to-face orientations (if
prescribed). By contrast, collaboration to determine technological choices to improve learning for students was ranked as the fifth highest competency and role for distance education administrators and seventh for online faculty. Thus, the consistent production of new, relevant knowledge to the content area being taught was the seventh highest
competency and role ranking for distance education administrators and the fifth for online faculty.
TABLE 7
RANKINGS OF IMPORTANCE OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES – DISTANCE EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS (N=20) AND ONLINE FACULTY (N=52)
Rank, Frequencies, and Percentages Core Competency and Role
Administrator High Priority
Faculty High Priority Provide grades, feedback, and validation of
the learner’s work 1 15 75.0% 1 35 68.6%
Facilitating online activities that
support student learning 2 13 65.0% 2 33 64.7%
Creation and design of online learning tasks
and assignments 3 9 45.0% 3 30 58.8%
Attention to facilitating learner’s growth in
understanding of course content materials 4 6 30.0% 4 26 51.0% Collaboration to determine technological
choices to improve learning for students 5 6 30.0% 7 4 7.8% Provide learners with individual strategies to
engage in the course at the highest level 6 5 25.0% 6 9 10.1% Consistent production of new, relevant
knowledge to the content area being taught 7 4 20.0% 5 14 27.5% Soliciting peer and student feedback for
course improvement 8 2 10.0% 8 2 3.9%
Securing facilities for face-to-face
orientations (if prescribed) 9 1 5.0% 9 1 2.0%
Based on the Chi-square test analysis, there was a statistically significant difference in rankings by distance education administrators and online faculty for only one of the core competencies and roles – collaboration to determine technological choices to improve student learning (p=.05). Six (30.0%) administrators perceived making
technologic choices for online instruction as an important core competency and role. Only 4 (7.8%) faculty perceived the same level of importance. Thus, distance education administrators were significantly more likely to select making technology choices as an essential competency when teaching an online course. The results are displayed in Table 8.
TABLE 8
CHI SQUARE FOR RANKINGS OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES - DISTANCE EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS (N=20) AND ONLINE FACULTY (N=52)
Core Competency and Role Pearson Value
df Significance
Provide grades, feedback, and validation of
the learner’s work 3.222 2 .200
Facilitating online activities that
Support student learning .022 2 .989
Creation and design of online learning
tasks and assignments 1.523 2 .467
Attention to facilitating learner’s growth in
understanding of course content materials 2.666 2 .264 Collaboration to determine technological
choices to improve learning for students 5.851 2 .054* Provide learners with individual strategies
Core Competency and Role Pearson Value
df Significance
Consistent production of new, relevant
knowledge to the content area being taught .430 2 .807 Soliciting peer and student feedback for
course improvement 2.465 2 .292
Securing facilities for face-to-face
orientations (if prescribed) .498 2 .779
Note: df= Degrees of Freedom; * p<0.05; Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Findings of Research Question 3
Is there a significant difference in the perceived rankings of specific competencies and roles between distance education administrators and faculty based upon varying demographic characteristics (gender, age, ethnic background, years teaching experience in community college, years of online teaching experience in community college)?
Data analogous to this question were obtained from distance education
administrators’ and online faculty’s responses to Demographic Information (Items 1-5) on the Survey of Competencies for Teaching an Online Course. Scale scores and mean scale values were established for gender (1=Male, 2=Female), age (1=33-40, 2=41-48, 3=49-55, 4=56 or more), years of teaching experience in community college (1=1-5, 2=6- 10, 3=11-15, 4=16-20, 5= 21 or more), and years of online teaching experience in a community college (Low, Medium, High). Tables 9-25 display one-way ANOVA results of distance education administrators’ and online faculty’s rankings of core competencies and roles for teaching a online course by gender, age, community college teaching experience, and community college online teaching experience.
Gender
One-way ANOVA tests were performed using distance education administrators and online faculty ranking of core competencies and skills as the dependent variables in the statistical analysis and respondent gender as the independent variable. Tables 9 and 10 present he results from the ANOVA tests for distance education administrators, and Table 11 and 12 display the results for online faculty.
For distance education administrators, when gender was considered, a statistically significant difference was identified in only one of the nine core competencies and roles, Secure Facilities (F=.03). There was no significant difference for the other eight
competencies and roles (facilitate to support student learning, provide learner
engagement strategies, grades and feedback, produce new, relevant knowledge, facilitate understanding of course content, make technology choices, create online tasks and learning assignments, and solicit feedback on the course).
As it relates to the distance learning administrators’ perceived importance of securing facilities when gender is considered, the mean score (2.50) for male
administrators suggests a higher level of importance than the mean score (3.0) for female administrators. As indicated by Table 11, male distance education administrator
respondents, more so than females, indicated that Securing Facilities was an important competency and role when teaching an online course. Therefore, the data indicated the perceived level of importance was influenced by gender for one of the nine core
TABLE 9
ONE-WAY ANOVA FOR ADMINISTRATOR RANKINGS OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES- GENDER (N=20)
Competency/Role df Mean Square F Ratio F Probability Facilitate to Support Student Learning
between groups 1 .038 .101 .754
within groups 18 .376
Total 19 Provide Learner Engagement Strategies
between groups 1 .086 .200 .660
within groups 18 .429
Total 19 Grades and Feedback
between groups 1 .060 .290 .597
within groups 18 .205
Total 19 Produce New, Relevant Knowledge
between groups 1 1.152 2.064 .168
within groups 18 .558
Total 19 Facilitate Understanding of Course Content
between groups 1 .610 1.194 .289
within groups 18 .511
Total 19 Making Technology Choices
between groups 1 .610 .832 .374
within groups 18 .733
Total 19 Create Online Tasks and Assignments
between groups 1 .086 .098 .758
within groups 18 .873
Total 19 Solicit Feedback on Course
between groups 1 .610 1.340 .262
within groups 18 .455
Competency/Role df Mean Square F Ratio F Probability Secure Facilities between groups 1 1.050 5.400 .032* within groups 18 .194 Total 19 Note: df= Degrees of Freedom; * p<0.05; Not all respondents answered every survey item.
TABLE 10
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE ONE-WAY ANOVA FOR ADMINISTRATOR RANKINGS OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES- GENDER (N=20)
Competency/Role N Mean Standard
Deviation Standard Error Secure Facilities Male 6 2.50 .837 .342 Female 14 3.00 .000 .000 Total 20 2.85 .489 .109
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
For online faculty, when gender was considered, a statistically significant difference was identified in only one of the nine core competencies and roles, produce new and relevant knowledge (F=.01). There was no significant difference for the other eight competencies and roles (facilitate to support student learning, provide learner engagement strategies, grades and feedback, facilitate understanding of course content, make technology choices, create online tasks and learning assignments, solicit feedback on the course, and secure facilities). Table 11 records these results.
Male online faculty respondents, more so than females, indicated that producing new and relevant knowledge was an important competency and role when teaching an online course. In Table 12, the mean score (1.74) for male respondents shows a high
mean score (2.32) for female respondents. For online faculty, then, the data indicated the perceived level of importance of for generating relevant knowledge as a distance learning core competency was influenced by gender.
TABLE 11
ONE-WAY ANOVA FOR ONLINE FACULTY RANKINGS OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES- GENDER (N=52)
Competency/Role df Mean Square F Ratio F Probability Facilitate to Support Student Learning
between groups 1 .088 0234 .631
within groups 48 .377
Total 49 Provide Learner Engagement Strategies
between groups 1 .294 .687 .411
within groups 48 .428
Total 49 Grades and Feedback
between groups 1 .228 .420 .520
within groups 48 .544
Total 49 Produce New, Relevant Knowledge
between groups 1 4.024 7.332 .009*
within groups 48 .551
Total 49 Facilitate Understanding of Course Content
between groups 1 .126 .256 .615
within groups 48 .493
Total 49 Making Technology Choices
between groups 1 .300 .714 .402
within groups 48 .420
Competency/Role df Mean Square F Ratio F Probability Create Online Tasks and Assignments
between groups 1 .031 .046 .831
within groups 48 .666
Total 49 Solicit Feedback on Course
between groups 1 .099 .322 .573 within groups 48 .308 Total 49 Secure Facilities between groups 1 .001 .006 .937 within groups 48 .135 Total 49 Note: df= Degrees of Freedom; * p<0.05; Not all respondents answered every survey item.
TABLE 12
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE ONE-WAY ANOVA FOR ONLINE FACULTY RANKINGS OF CORE COMPETENCIES AND ROLES- GENDER (N=52)
Competency/Role N Mean Standard
Deviation
Standard Error Produce New, Relevant Knowledge
Male 19 1.74 .653 .150
Female 31 2.32 .791 .142
Total 50 2.10 .789 .112
Note: Not all respondents answered every survey item.
Age
Table 13 for distance education administrators displays the results of one-way ANOVA tests performed using distance education administrator rankings of core competencies and skills as the dependent variables in the statistical analysis and
respondent scaled score value for age as the independent variable. Post hoc analysis using Bonferroni and Scheffe tests were performed where a statistically significance difference existed.
For distance education administrators, when respondent age was considered, a statistically significant difference was identified in only one of nine core competencies and roles - facilitate understanding of course content (F=.03). There was no significant difference for the other eight competencies and roles (facilitate to support student learning, provide learner engagement strategies, grades and feedback, produce new and relevant knowledge, make technology choices, create online tasks and learning
assignments, solicit feedback on the course, and secure facilities).
The post hoc Bonferroni and Scheffe tests of the ANOVA, as displayed in Table 14, indicated that the mean score (1.00) for respondents between 33 and 40 years old